I/P Engine, Inc. v. AOL, Inc. et al
ORDER denying 923 Renewed Motion to Compel Deposition of Dr. Beckerand for Enlargement of Time to Oppose Plaintiff's Motion for Post-judgment Royalties; directing defendants to respond to plaintiff's Motion for an Award of Post-Judgment Royalties within ten days of entry of this order; permitting plaintiff to file a reply within five days of defendants' response. Signed by District Judge Raymond A. Jackson and filed on 5/1/13. (mwin, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
I/P ENGINE, INC.,
EHK, US DISTRICT COURT
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:llcv512
AOL INC., et a/.,
Before the Court is Defendants' Renewed Motion to Compel Deposition of Dr. Becker
and for Enlargement of Time to Oppose Plaintiffs Motion for Post-judgment Royalties. On
April 17, 2013, the Court entered an order directing Plaintiff to respond to the Defendants'
motion on an expedited basis. The Court also directed the Defendants to forgo filing a reply
brief in support of their motion. Having consideredthe pleadings, the Court finds no basis to
permit further discovery on Plaintiffs Motion for an Award of Post-Judgment Royalties (ECF
No. 822). Accordingly, Defendants' Renewed Motion to Compel Deposition of Dr. Becker and
for Enlargement of Time to Oppose Plaintiffs Motion for Post-judgment Royalties is DENIED.
Defendants are ORDERED to respond to Plaintiffs Motion for an Award of Post-Judgment
Royalties WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS of the entry of this Order. Plaintiff is permitted to file a
reply to Defendants' response WITHIN FIVE (5) DAYS of the entry of Defendants' response.
In the event that the Court finds that oral argument would assist its decisional process, it will
notify the parties.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
May 1 ,2013
United States District 3ud&